Haven't read the whole thread and not sure if this has been discussed. In a round robin tournament, it's not fair to all the teams if a player is or is not suspended against your team or a team that's needs to win or lose to help you move on. Did that make any sense at all? If you can see what I'm saying, bet if he had 3 games left, he would have served them for the round robin part of the cup.

What gets me is the explanation that Baker gives. Basically he said that they always kept this in mind just in case they were eliminated before the 8 games are up? Really? I get that Branch doesn't want the Knights to look bad on home ice after doing all the leg work to get them the cup again! It's gonna make it that much sweeter when they lose for the 3rd year in a row in the Mem Cup.

I just hope the players are paying attention. There's a lesson to be learned here.Instead of using your elbows or shoulder to deliver a head check use your stick.Watch the video,practice the Stolarz swing and use it wisely.The suspension will be half as long

ranger26 wrote:I just hope the players are paying attention. There's a lesson to be learned here.Instead of using your elbows or shoulder to deliver a head check use your stick.Watch the video,practice the Stolarz swing and use it wisely.The suspension will be half as long

It's pretty bad when what should be a sarcastic comment, is actually accurate...at least in this case. Totally wrong, totally flawed. You could bring in a room full of tyke players and play the videos of both Ho-Sangs suspension incident and Stolarz and ask them which incident is the least acceptable in hockey. I am willing to bet most would pick the Stolarz incident with little hesitation. And this is from a guy who is not a particular fan of Josh Ho-Sang. A new Geico commercial perhaps...

My initial reaction to the incident was that it is not surprising he got 8 games. At the same time, the incident was not all that hard of a shot, more of a tap, which some can argue doesnt matter, myself included at times, and did not result in injury, again something that shouldn't matter.

What I dislike about the reduction of suspension, is that it sends the message that whats a suspension in the regular season or the playoffs, is not a suspension in the Memorial Cup. Look at the Joey Hishon injury a couple of years ago. That head check gets 10-15 games in the regular season or playoffs, but only got 1 in the Memorial Cup.

Don't be upset and think the Knights are being handed any favours here, this has nothing to do with them or Stolarz, as a favor etc. Infact, it's asinine to think that.

The problem, is that players are being taught that the consequence of the actions is less severe the more there is on the line, as the league(s) try to maintain a quality product. The length of the suspension happened to be so that if London advanced to the OHL finals or West Finals, they could ice their best squad. Now that they are out, it is reduced so they can ice their best squad in the Mem cup. The league has taken the stance of "lets allow the best to play, so its best against best".

And this argument carries over to Ho-Sang suspension. Windsor gets eliminated and down comes a ridiculous number of games again, for an incident that all the hockey panels have discussed to be ridiculous and embarassing for the league. Heres the catch, all he misses are regular season games, games that the league has evidently placed less weight on, when players break the rules.

That to me is ridiculous, it is how it has always been, but, In my humble opinion, is what has helped diminish the reputation of this league.

Again, so people don't think I'm flaming the Knights or Stolarz, this is an instance above them, and it would be the same no matter the team in this situation, IMO.

I agree this isn't a favor to the Knights. The only reason the suspension to Stolarz has been reduced is because the League feels that the London Knights are stronger with him than without. If it had been a benchwarmer with the same suspension, it wouldn't have been lifted. Had it been a star player on any other team in the league in the same situation, the suspension would have been lifted. This move is purely to make the League look better. Sure it makes them look wishy-washy and weak now, but no one will remember this if the Knights win the Memorial Cup. Except us. And many of us won't remember.

Donna

24 OHL arenas and counting...

If the instigator rule is killing hockey now, having to fight every time you throw a clean hit would kill hockey even faster.

The eight game suspension to Stolarz had the intended effect. The act caused him to be suspended, which made it harder for the Knights to win the OHL Championship, and perhaps ultimately cost them the OHL Championship. The suspension was not likely intended to cause Stolarz to miss any of the games in the Memorial Cup. Therefore I feel that truncating his suspension to time served and allowing him to participate in the Memorial Cup is not a big deal.

If Stolarz is likely to come back for next year (I have no idea how old he is and I'm not going to bother looking that up) and the league wants to suspend his sentence so he has to carry the rest out in the regular season next year, I am OK with that too.

My initial reaction to the incident was that it is not surprising he got 8 games. At the same time, the incident was not all that hard of a shot, more of a tap, which some can argue doesnt matter, myself included at times, and did not result in injury, again something that shouldn't matter.

What I dislike about the reduction of suspension, is that it sends the message that whats a suspension in the regular season or the playoffs, is not a suspension in the Memorial Cup. Look at the Joey Hishon injury a couple of years ago. That head check gets 10-15 games in the regular season or playoffs, but only got 1 in the Memorial Cup.

Don't be upset and think the Knights are being handed any favours here, this has nothing to do with them or Stolarz, as a favor etc. Infact, it's asinine to think that.

The problem, is that players are being taught that the consequence of the actions is less severe the more there is on the line, as the league(s) try to maintain a quality product. The length of the suspension happened to be so that if London advanced to the OHL finals or West Finals, they could ice their best squad. Now that they are out, it is reduced so they can ice their best squad in the Mem cup. The league has taken the stance of "lets allow the best to play, so its best against best".

And this argument carries over to Ho-Sang suspension. Windsor gets eliminated and down comes a ridiculous number of games again, for an incident that all the hockey panels have discussed to be ridiculous and embarassing for the league. Heres the catch, all he misses are regular season games, games that the league has evidently placed less weight on, when players break the rules.

That to me is ridiculous, it is how it has always been, but, In my humble opinion, is what has helped diminish the reputation of this league.

Again, so people don't think I'm flaming the Knights or Stolarz, this is an instance above them, and it would be the same no matter the team in this situation, IMO.

Suspensions in the playoffs are shorter than what they would be in the regular season. Not to mention some suspensions can be bought back so the player doesn't miss any time at all. What does that teach the player? On top of that, when a player gets called for high-sticking in the first period of the first exhibition game, there's a good chance he won't get called for the same infraction in a game 7 overtime in the finals. There are disparities all over the place, not just when it comes to situations like this

The problem here is that this wasn't a elbow, or hit from behind or a slew-foot. It was a swing to the head of a player skating away after a play that happens 99% of the time. So this sends the message that it's okay to do something like that and as long as you are a good player on a good team, it's okay. Also I'm hearing rumors that Bell might be back for the Cup. If that's true, does that mean that Ho-Sang's suspension will be reduced? Can't have your cake and eat it too! But I guess in this league you apparently can!

Only the OHL and Dave Branch could be this predictable. He's like a used car salesman and the Hunters are the goons that strong arm you when you try to bring the lemon back. The only problem is he's the only dealership in Ontario.

Darryl Sutter to Jerome Iginla one night in Montreal..."Did you bring your dress tonight? No? Well you shouldve because you're playing like a woman."
Belleville Bulls 9
London Knights 2

Otto wrote:Suspensions in the playoffs are shorter than what they would be in the regular season. Not to mention some suspensions can be bought back so the player doesn't miss any time at all. What does that teach the player? On top of that, when a player gets called for high-sticking in the first period of the first exhibition game, there's a good chance he won't get called for the same infraction in a game 7 overtime in the finals. There are disparities all over the place, not just when it comes to situations like this

A high stick has always been a high stick, no matter the game. I agree, some penalties are forgiven it seems the later the season goes. The league letting a player off who struck another in the head, with his stick, not by accident, but as an act of aggression towards that player, is apples and oranges to the point you're trying to make.

Ho-Sang deserves 15 for his act, while the stolarz act serves 6 games? If you hadn't already known, and had to guess: Does a player who is edging for body position, causing a player to fall and hurt himself along the boards, a play seen 10 times a game with no injury, or a player swinging his stick at and connecting with the head of an opponent, which gets 15 games?

It's really simple. If Stolarz is going to play in the Memorial Cup then the suspension needed to be cut short.

It's an unfair advantage for the "other" teams in the tournament. The 3 teams that play London should play against London's best line up. If Stolarz is not eligible for one of the games then the first team the Knights play would have an unfair advantage because on paper said team would play against London's back up. The other 2 teams would have to beat the Knights starting goalie.